I like J4…because I like a G1/J1 on Russia. I take out 10 infantry in western Russian zones, and wait for foolish Russian counterattacks which exposes them to losing more units. Total kill Russia first strat for all three axis. J1 from the east and take 3 territories (the Mongolian troops are out of position and not an issue). I1 build mech/tank and head to the front ASAP. I then begin to strat bomb Moscow when in range (usually G3/I3). I keep USA out of the war until they declare at the end of US3 (limiting them to 52 IPCs for first three rounds, importantly* the limit of 3 units at each factory prevent a huge buildup. I take out China by round 4-5 using all 21 aircraft and 2 factories on mainland making mechs and tanks.  Japan usually has 6-10 Russian IPCs, so Japan usually collects 50+ before even taking the money isles (gaining USA 10 IPC NO three times). USA cant get to anything important in Europe before US6, and by then I am taking out Moscow (severely weakened by combination of the loss of eastern IPCs to Japan, strat bombing, and first round loss of 10 infantry). I call this strat the “Land War in Asia”, and I find it successful far more than 50%.

First edition is not balanced, it’s even worse than the current rules. Japan had 28 aircraft in the OOB version of the very first release. The India push was insanely easy, and Japan could/would win practically every game.

The current edition could be balanced very easily by removing about 2 Japanese aircraft, and adding about 2 Chinese infantry.

I am interested in a Southern Wisconsin group - I live in Janesville Wisconsin. I am interested in playing Global 1941 or 1914, but I also own Battle of the Bulge, D-Day, and Classic Axis and Allies.

Yeah I think we’ve reached a consensus…the move was totally legally, quite brilliant, and devastating to my war effort (which I had been winning).

@taamvan:

that’s when knowing all the rules can be a big advantage, its not all that realistic that you can land on a newly fitted out carrier in a hostile zone, but its a devastating combo

Yeah I’ve been playing this game for a long long time and I know the rules by heart, and have in fact played every edition of Axis and Allies since the original MB (which I still own two of). I have just never had this specific combination of events all happen simultaneously in one attack…all have happened individually many times.

1. Fighters attack at max range.
2. CV builds in the sea zone for them to land on.
3. Aircraft retreat.

Yes I’km aware of the kamikaze rules and those didn’t com into play here…they in fact could not be applied since none of the requisite islands had been captured/recaptured (I avoided Iwo Jima the previous turn for this reason).

So it looks like the previous two responders are in disagreement, but by my reading of the rules, it appears the move was legal - does anyone see language anywhere which specifically states that an aircraft with no remaining movement cannot retreat?

Alright thanks…so it was all legal…those combined maneuvers (landing on CV being built and retreating/submerging after damaging my carriers), totally out of the blue, was genius…that combined with a marvelous attack he made on my UK fleet in the Med has likely done me in…

Considering trying a house rule called ‘Encirclement’. The military and historical precedents are numerous where units, division, or entire armies were encircled and forced to capitulate (Bastogne aside).

The crux of the rules is as follows: If a territory is attacked from three or more adjacent land territories and there is no “retreat” available (I know defenders cannot retreat, but this rule will use the core of the retreat rules), then all defenders defend at 1 less than normal (Infantry on a 1, Tanks on a 2, Fighters on a 3, etc).

Rationale: Turtling is too common, unrealistic, and too gamey and gimmicky. I’m tired of the “bowling ball” strategies where you move your entire army en masse towards your eventual destination ignoring all adjacent zones.

What are thoughts an opinions on the impact of this rule, as well as modifications to the rule to improve it?

Addendum - I obviously thought my fleet was safe since no aircraft seemed in range…did not anticipate losing the entire thing while inflicting almost no casualties except a DD and a FTR.

Can aircraft with no remaining movement points retreat from combat?

Scenario:

USA had 3 CV in SZ6 containing 6 FTR. Japan moved 3 TAC and 3 FTR along with 3 SUB and a DD into attack. The 6 aircraft moved 4 spaces to enter the sea zone, which ended up being legal because the player was purchasing 3 CV. He fly in and attacks and each of the CV was damaged by subs which can’t hit aircraft, and he called a retreat. He left the aircraft in the SZ and submerged the subs. At the end of the turn he landed the 5 surviving aircraft on the carriers and I had to remove my surviving aircraft because the carriers were damaged. (Almost all aircraft on both sides missed, the only real hits were from the subs)

If an aircraft with no movement remaining retreats can they remain in the zone??